Opinion
DA 23-0100
10-03-2023
STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ANTHONY CRAIG WEIMER, Defendant and Appellant.
ORDER
Defendant and Appellant Anthony Craig Weimer, via counsel, has moved for a stay of the execution of a sentence of the Eleventh Judicial District Court, Flathead County, in Cause No. DC-20-207C, pursuant to M. R. App. P. 22(6). The State of Montana indicated to Weimer's counsel that it would object to Weimer's motion, but it did not file a response.
A jury found Weimer guilty of felony Criminal Mischief. On December 6, 2022, while released from custody on his own recognizance and awaiting sentencing, Weimer filed a lengthy pro se Motion to Dismiss, in which Weimer stated that he was invoking "Art. II, Part II [sic], Section 12 of the Montana Constitution for the defense of his person and § 49-1-103, MCA, to use any force necessary to protect his person and shall exercise his equal right to arrest this Court, Plaintiff and any other offenders acting on behalf of the government pursuant to § 46-6-502(1), MCA[.]" Shortly thereafter, the State petitioned to revoke Weimer's release, arguing that Weimer's threat to forcibly "arrest" the Judge, the prosecutors, and other government employees-considered in context of his previous communications, his actions in the underlying criminal matter, and a pattern of escalating accusations against the State and the court-"reasonably tend to produce a fear that his actions will be carried out," The District Court then issued an arrest warrant, setting a $200,000 bond, and Weimer was remanded into custody on December 12, 2022, where he remained until his sentencing hearing.
Article II, Sec. 12, of the Montana Constitution provides, "The right of any person to keep or bear arms in defense of his own home, person, and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall not be called in question, but nothing herein contained shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons."
Section 49-1-103, MCA, provides, "Any necessary force may be used to protect from wrongful injury the person or property of one's self, of a wife, husband, child, parent, or other relative or member of one's family, or of a ward, servant, master, or guest."
Section 46-6-502(1), MCA, provides, "A private person may arrest another when there is probable cause to believe that the person is committing or has committed an offense and the existing circumstances require the person's immediate arrest. The private person may use reasonable force to detain the arrested person."
The District Court sentenced Weimer to five years with Department of Corrections. In its sentencing order, it referenced Weimer's motion to dismiss, explaining: "The motion, marked by hostility towards the judiciary and judicial process, concludes with the Defendant invoking his perceived right to arrest the court and use any force necessary to protect his person. Given Defendant's escalating behavior, placement with the Montana Department of Corrections is appropriate . ..."
Weimer then moved to stay execution of sentence. At a subsequent hearing, the court denied bail, noting that at sentencing, it found that Weimer poses a danger to the safety of any person or the community, referencing Weimer's "escalating behavior and hostility to the Court and officers of the court" as one of several bases for its finding.
Weimer now asks this Court to reverse the District Court's denial of stay. He alleges that the remarks he made in his motion to dismiss are insufficient to justify the court finding him to be a danger to the community and the court abused its discretion in denying the stay.
If an appeal is taken and the defendant is admitted to bail, a sentence of imprisonment must be stayed by the trial court. Section 46-20-204(2), MCA. A defendant should be admitted to bail bond pending appeal if "the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the safety of any person or the community." Section 46-9-107, MCA. If, in the trial court's discretion under § 46-9-107, MCA, it admits a convicted defendant to bail pending appeal, it must stay the execution of the sentence under these statutes. However, if the trial court does not admit the defendant to bail pending appeal, there is no mandate to stay his sentence under § 46-20-204(2), MCA. Moore v. McCormick, 260 Mont. 305, 307-08, 858 P.2d 1254, 1256 (1993).
When considering an appellant's motion to stay under M. R. App. P. 22, this Court reviews the trial court's denial of a stay for abuse of discretion. City of Missoula v. Mountain Water Co., No. DA 15-0375, Or. (Mont. Aug. 18,2015). An abuse of discretion occurs when a court acts arbitrarily without the employment of conscientious judgment or exceeds the bounds of reason, in view of all the circumstances, ignoring recognized principles resulting in substantial injustice. State v. Nelson, 2008 MT 359, ¶ 20, 346 Mot. 366, 195 P.3d 825 (citation omitted). In this case, we find no abuse of discretion in the District Court's determination that Weimer's statements indicated that he posed a danger to the community. In making its ruling, the court found that Weimer's statements about the right to bear arms, the use of force, and his intention to conduct a citizen's arrest of the prosecutor, the Judge, and other government employees was not out of character for Weimer, but rather was part of a pattern of "escalating behavior and hostility."
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Appellant's motion for stay of execution of judgment in Cause No. DC-20-207C is DENIED.
The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this order to all counsel of record.